It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Bill introduced in Vermont : 500$ fee for non-gun owners

page: 7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 05:02 PM
This has to be the most moronic thing I have heard in a long time. I thought the conservatives wanted government OUT of peoples lives? Are they going to require people know how to shoot a gun? If so, who is going to train all these people? This is like making people who don't know how drive own a car or be fined. Making people who don't want guns and don't know how to use them is irresponsible. This is just to asinine, I don't even think this could be true.

posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 06:15 PM

Originally posted by AndrewTB
Its funny because the antis always seem to think crime is where the guns are at. The truth is usually the opposite. I also find it useful to bring up a little place called Kennesaw, GA. Not sure if there are any other towns like it, but perhaps I shall share a link to inform some of you that still dont understand the concept of good vs bad being armed.

25 Years Murder Free

This is interesting..because the three guys who robbed me at gunpoint were very afraid that I had a gun hidden. I was astonished by this. Here were three guys with a gun and afraid of someone else with a gun. They really needed another line of work. They got caught and did time for this in the end.

Most people armed or not want to bother anyone else or be bothered. I think social engineers and utopia type thinkers ignore this knowledge or concept in order to default through on their Utopian ideas.

fleabit wrote..

So.. guns are the only answer for home defense? Ever hear of those new-fangled contraptions that gives off an alarm when someone breaks into your home? Home alarm system.. hmmm... there is a thought!

I wouldn't trust half the people I know with a firearm. And you want to try to force them to have one?

Tell me you went to pubic school but got over most of it and began to think for yourself. Burglar Alarms are fine..whether on a vehicle or on a home. But when seconds count..the police and authorities are minutes away. Such was the case when I got robbed at gunpoint above. Those three guys followed me from some 6 miles down the road before they robbed me on my scooter at night coming home from work. We cannot bring a gun to where we work..we will lose our jobs if we get caught. This includes in the company parking our cars.

Alarm systems are fine..but what do you do when an alarm system is disabled by someone who knows what they are doing. Same with the phones. What do you do when someone knows to put out a cell phone dis abler??

What a thinking person knows is that they may be on their own and plan accordingly. Do not count on technology to help you here. Don't get me is fine and wonderful. But what happens if you cannot get to it in time?? Or it is disabled. Leave yourself some options. You would be remiss not to think this way.

Romekje wrote...

Seems like you run into alot of situations that require violence to solve...?

I dont carry weapons because i never need them, or run into situations where i might have use for them.

Taking property from often earned at RISK or a type of violence simply because the perpetrator causes the person to work or RISK to replace the property RISK twice. This is true whether covered by insurance or not..for the insurance was most certainly not free.
We have to go to public school to get so dumb we cannot recognize this for what it is. People take RISKS in their daily lives to earn their properties.

More and more we are finding more and more two legged wildlife run amok out here. This is called Civilization. Not!!!!! This is de evolution.
I don't look for situations where I might have use for weapons as well. But I did not look for three fellows to rob me at gunpoint that night.

SevenStarrz wrote..

Well, this seems more than a bit silly. I mean, gun ownership is an important choice. Emphasis on the word "choice".

Actually, I'm having a hard time taking this seriously. I don't think anything like this would ever

You are is silly ..very silly and the emphasis on rights here is choice...the choice to do or not to do.
Thank goodness most Americans are not as dumb as this pece of recommended legislation. But I think they were trying to make a point here in proposing such legislation.
Another 40 years of public/television/movie/education and Americans might not be so smart.


I carry a Sweedish Mora Knife most of the time in my back pack. A very useful knife for the monies. There are better knives out there but the price begins to go through the roof for many of them. The Mora is a knife priced right, well built, and one I can afford to lose if it should happen. I do not count on my Mora knife as my primary tool/weapon. The first tool/weapon is my brain next to and accompanied by my feet/legs. Then comes my Colt 1911...sometimes replaced by a .357magnum. All of these are tools. I hope, like many here, never to have to use... any of them.
You choose what works best for you. No problem by me there. Also it is your choice..not mine. Congratulations on being able to make a choice of your preference. In many nations the people do not have such an choice.

Oh..and as an aside... ..among those who know how to use them....and history records ...edged weapons and their wounds can be much more horrible/terrible than guns. Talk about brutal. History is replete with this evidence. Most peoples of today are totally unawares of this history and knowledge...unless one is a Coroner...or in a related field.

sbctinfantry wrote...

That question is, "What were those who came before us thinking about when they created the second amendment, and why is it relevant today. Why is it right and just to tax something that was explicitly addressed previously and also became a tennet of our nation?"

This is a good question. Thanks for posting it about taxing something. I am remided of the olde Poll Tax on voting. It was struck down because it was a tax on a Fundamental American Right to Vote.
This is the pattern of why such a piece of legislation would not work or resonate with Americans. There are other reasons..such as Choice. Also a fundamental American right. To do or not to do..with ones monies.
Thanks for that view on the tax.

The Sword wrote...


I don't want to own a gun. I don't have a place to put it, I don't have time to learn how to use it and I certainly will not pay a "fine" for not owning one.

It's ironic how 2nd amendment folks cry so much about their rights being taken away and yet, they want to take away my right NOT to own a gun?

I have two words for that.

Not me. I am very pro 2nd Amendment. If you do not want to own a gun that is your business..not mine. Vice versa too. If you want to own a gun..that too is your business not mine. That is your right.

Bon Appetit.

Thanks to all for their posts,

posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 06:20 PM
so pay 500$ for a gun(which it almost seems inevitable for someone not to get shot if everyone has guns) to (hopefully not) eventually shoot someone

- OR -

pay 500$ for NOT having a gun (LOL, americans), which they will eventually have to anyways or face another 500$ fine down the line.

win - win for the state. they're making money off of everything here. plus the amount of people that will have to register.
wow. also could give cops stronger rights in when they're trying to arrest someone, which they do wrongly by accident at times, so this will give them the right to be harsher since they no longer have to assume if everyone has a gun, they can now base their tactics off of everyone having a weapon. YIKES.....

posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 08:26 PM
Quit your crying. You let criminals run your government. You will get what you deserve.

posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 08:31 PM
you don't have a right to be disarmed. If you are costing our health services billions for your lack of personal responsibility. You are fined if you do not protect yourself by wearing a seat belt right?
Well, if you are attacked by a criminal and you are unarmed you will most likely die or require medical services due to your irresponsibility. This irresponsibility costs taxpayers.
You must carry a firearm for your personal defense.

as sure as death is 100% for humans, so is the chance of being a victim of a crime.

posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 10:08 PM
reply to post by Vitchilo

This Bill is a slam of Obama care requiring people to purchase healthcare to remain in good standing with the government. This bill will require people to purchase a firearm in order to remain in good standing!!

posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 10:25 PM
I don't know about everyone else, but personally I believe in freedom. I don't agree with the government - local, state, or federal - telling me I have to do anything beyond reason or they will penalize me. It's surprising to me that a lot of conservative people seem to be all for this, yet staunchly oppose mandatory health care (something I also oppose, despite having what you would likely categorize as a highly liberal bent to my views... but then I’m also not an Obama supporter despite my liberal views.) I believe people should have the right to choose, without penalty. The commerce clause is something I do not agree with either.

If I'm a pacifist and don't believe in owning a weapon, I should not be penalized for my personal convictions. Just as someone who wishes to own a gun, collect guns, etc. should not be penalized for theirs. I respect gun aficionados and owners' rights. I only ask that you respect my philosophical beliefs in equal measure. I believe in freedom, whether you’re liberal or conservative in your views.

Just my two cents. Peace.

posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 10:28 PM
Since this is a 10 year old proposal and the representative in question is no longer in the state legislature, it shouldn't deserve a post, but I found it interesting, that so many people on this board cheer for the idea that the government can force you to buy a product or pay a fine if you don't. Since the product is a gun, some folks here think it's the greatest thing that happened to the United States since Paul Revere warned the British that they won't take our guns, but boy oh boy when the product in question was health care, it was unconstitutional, socialism etc etc. Interesting where our collective priorities are in this country.

posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 11:43 PM
I think it would be best if we could get another 29 pages on this thread, based on a ridiculous idea that never came to fruition, because it was ridiculous.. YEARS ago.

Let's continue arguing over pointless topics, it should make the world a better place.

<< 4  5  6   >>

log in